Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Adding test examples for the SPIN package and correcting some bugs #1771
This PR contains three main modifications:
Julien Tranchida (email@example.com)
By submitting this pull request, I agree, that my contribution will be included in LAMMPS and redistributed under either the GNU General Public License version 2 (GPL v2) or the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 (LGPL v2.1).
Correctness of the changes is checked with the newly setup benchmark examples.
Post Submission Checklist
Please check the fields below as they are completed after the pull request has been submitted. Delete lines that don't apply
Further Information, Files, and Links
- addind 4 first benchmark examples (in examples/SPIN/benchmark) - corrected typo in examples (in dump commands)
@julient31 I would not talk about "benchmark" in this context here, but about "validation". The former term is too often used in the context of LAMMPS to describe how fast a calculation is or how well it parallelizes rather than how accurate it is. Also there are references and files/folders using "benchmarck" instead of "benchmark". I would be ok with the term "benchmark" if @sjplimp, @athomps, @stanmoore1 can assure me that there would be no confusion, but at least the typo needs to be resolved. ;-)
@julient31 @akohlmey I agree that the term benchmark is confusing because it collides with the same word used in the context of LAMMPS performance. More generally, benchmarks are things that are measures of performance, capacity, distance traveled i.e. magnitudes. The examples provided appear to be measures of correctness rather than performance. I suggest replacing benchmarck with test. It's less exciting, but it is an accurate description and contains fewer characters.
@akohlmey @athomps Yes good point: benchmark was not very well chosen. I renamed the directory 'test_problems', and the sub-directories will be validating different calculations (validation_damped_exchange, validation_damped_precession, ...).
Yes. Not so much because of the dump command changes, but since it looks you also changed the thermo settings.
@akohlmey I generated fresh log files corresponding to the current results of the code / input examples.